Hizbullah Archives - Dr. Rich Swier

Tag Archive for: Hizbullah

Why Israel Should Embrace Its Role as a Regional Power

April 16, 2025/in Featured, Hot Topics, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Social Issues/by NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

Israel, long defined by a narrative of survival, now stands at a pivotal moment. It has proven its military superiority through recent operations against Hamas, Hizbullah, and Iran’s regional proxies. As Iran’s influence wanes amid economic woes and internal unrest, Israel faces a historic opportunity: to act not just defensively, but as a proactive regional leader.

Turkey’s growing presence in Syria and its neo-Ottoman ambitions introduce new complexities. With Turkish forces near Israel’s northern front, risks of miscalculation and escalation grow. Meanwhile, Iran’s nuclear ambitions remain the region’s most pressing threat. Delay is no longer viable — Israel must lead a coalition to either diplomatically or militarily ensure Iran never becomes nuclear-armed.

The Middle East is increasingly shaped by power competition. Turkey wields military reach and nostalgia, Qatar uses wealth and soft power, and Iran continues to export chaos. Global actors like China and Russia are also expanding their footprints, each driven by infrastructure investments or opportunistic alliances.

Yet Israel stands out. It is innovative, stable, and militarily unmatched. It must now act like the core regional power it is, not a beleaguered outlier. This demands a mindset shift — from survival to leadership. Strength, confidence, and purpose can attract partners and investment across the region.

Strategic normalization is key. Building on the Abraham Accords, Israel should deepen ties with Saudi Arabia, Oman, Morocco, and strengthen bonds with Egypt and Jordan. These ties must expand beyond security to include economic, technological, and cultural collaboration — for example, regional clean energy projects or tech education pipelines.

Managing rival powers is essential. Turkey can be balanced through partnerships with Greece, Cyprus, and the Balkans. Qatar’s influence can be countered through stronger direct communication with Arab audiences. Egypt should be quietly supported with water tech, counterterrorism, and economic initiatives.

The U.S. remains a vital ally, but Israel must prepare for strategic autonomy. Long-term defense agreements and deeper tech-intel cooperation can secure American backing. Simultaneously, outreach to Europe, India, and Africa should expand Israel’s global presence.

Engagement with China and Russia must be cautious. Israel should allow Chinese investment only in non-sensitive sectors, maintaining transparency with the U.S. Russia’s role in the region should be managed pragmatically but without overreliance.

Containing Iran remains central. Support for opposition groups, cyber capabilities, and visible military preparedness must be sustained. Diplomacy should always be an option — but never the only one.

To lead regionally, Israel must adopt a broad strategy: create a regional influence council, rebrand its image across the Arab world, spearhead infrastructure diplomacy, update its military doctrine, and establish regional education exchanges.

Leadership brings rewards — security, economic growth, prestige, and innovation. There will be obstacles, but ambition is key. As the saying goes, “He who strives, succeeds.” Israel has the capability. Now, it must embrace the responsibility.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Anti-Hamas protests in Gaza today!

Egyptian TV host Ibrahim Eissa: Hamas considers the lives of Palestinians cheap

Greta Thunberg arrested after blocking shipping company HQ over weapons shipments to Israel

The Jewish community’s fifth column

Saudi Journalist: Hamas And Hizbullah Spread A Culture Of Suicide, They Are Not Resistance Organizations

October 9, 2024/in Culture War, Featured, Hot Topics, Iranian influence, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Religion, Terrorism, Waste, Fraud and Abuse/by Middle East Media Research Institute

In an October 6, 2024 article in the London-based Saudi daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Saudi journalist and researcher Fahad Suleiman Shoqiran criticized the Hamas and Hizbullah terrorist organizations for appropriating the concept of “resistance.” He wrote that resistance means self-defense or waging war against an attacker, but the so-called resistance movements have charged it with a fundamentalist ideology that promotes a culture of suicide – a culture that is not just manifest in sending suicide bombers to blow themselves up in cafes in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, but in entrapping and endangering entire cities and societies. This culture, he added, maintained in the name of resistance or of Palestine, constitutes a crime against humanity, for which these organizations should stand trial.

The following are translated excerpts from Shoqiran’s article:[1]

“It is only natural that the situation in the region is tense, especially after these large [Israeli] attacks, which are broadcast live, and following the assassination of the leader of the Hizbullah militia, along with others who were killed or will be killed in the future. Israel is carrying out powerful operations. Countries are not charitable associations; they have their own interests, objectives and operations, and on this basis a well-founded and well-considered strategy must be formulated…

“The effort of the resistance axis and its militias to put Israel to the test and plumb [the depths] of its fury every couple of years is regrettable. After the 2006 war, which caused the deaths of more than two thousand Lebanese, as well as severe economic damage in the amount of two billion dollars, Nasrallah made his famous statement: ‘If I had known, I wouldn’t have kidnapped the two Israeli soldiers.’ In 2009 Hamas tested the Israelis again and caused huge massacres, and the same thing happened in 2012 and in 2014. Now [Hamas] is trying out a war with the Israelis while Lebanon is being pulverized…

“The problem today lies in the fact that the meaning of ‘resistance’ has expanded since the establishment of Hizbullah, the Palestinian brigades and the Hamas movement, [and this expansion] did not end [even] with the Houthis. The concept of resistance has been loaded and charged with fundamentalist ideology and does not mean self-defense or war waged against an attacker [anymore]. It has its own religious, ideological and political partisan context.

“The concept of resistance has become associated with escalating suicide attacks and with pressuring the enemy not through military action but rather through a culture of suicide. I am not referring here only to the jihad fighter from [Hamas’ military wing], the ‘Izz Ad-Din Al-Qassam Brigades, who blows himself up in a café in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv. Hamas has trapped the entire Palestinian people and Gaza inside the explosive belt of its recklessness, leaving them at the mercy of [its] irresponsible decision to test the response of the Israelis, who are known for their violence and destructiveness. As we know, the Israeli force is merciless, and the Arabs have become accustomed to it over their history, which is rife with defeats and nakbas. The Lebanese, Syrian, Palestinian and Yemeni people have lost enormous sums, economies have crashed and peoples have lost their stability and are at a loss [what to do] under the rule of foolish and reckless regimes.

“For decades, the Palestinian cause has served the [Arab] statesmen as a moral snare, [used to] justify their crimes to the peoples. Countries and capital cities have been pulverized, entire states have been occupied and millions have been expelled [from their homes] in the name of resistance and in the name of Palestine. If the nations are determined to evolve, they must establish courts where the leaders of the resistance will be brought to justice. When a culture of suicide develops—ranging from the entrapment of an individual to the entrapment of entire capitals and societies—it constitutes a crime against humanity. That is why there is widespread sympathy for [these] heavy disasters, whose victims have been taken hostage by dark forces subordinate to states that have abandoned true Islam.

“Ultimately, history always draws its conclusions, and we must take note of the fact that this period is the most difficult of all and that failing to return to the roots, to the law and to [state] institutions will jeopardize global security, for times have changed… Some of the norms and moral [principles] that are part of the discourse about Palestine were formulated by the Muslim Brotherhood [MB], and a group of intellectuals and academics now parrot them. Today the [resistance] axis is trying to revive the MB discourse with all its might and to establish the MB lexicon on Palestine as the permanent [lexicon used] in political commentary and in media coverage of the war Israel is waging. This is an act of injustice and of ignoring the development that has occurred among some of the Arab peoples, especially those that have opted for peace and sighed agreements of tolerance and reconciliation among the [Abrahamic] religions. This attack and escapade of Hamas’ was just meant to delay any peace agreement that was supposed to be [signed]…”

Fahad Suleiman Shoqiran

Fahad Shoqiran is a Saudi writer and researcher who also founded the Riyadh philosophers group. His writings have appeared in pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, Alarabiya.net, among others. He also blogs on philosophies, cultures and arts. He tweets @shoqiran.

SOURCE:

[1] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), October 6, 2024.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The ‘Pager’ Operation — a lot more than we thought!

IDF forces demolish Hezbollah tunnel which crossed into Israeli territory

RELATED VIDEO: Iran’s Crimes and Media Silence.

Anti-Liberal Forces Are Preparing For The ‘Final Battle’ Against The West

July 2, 2024/in Culture War, Elections, Featured, Hot Topics, National Security, News, Policy, Politics, Religion/by Middle East Media Research Institute

Russia | MEMRI Daily Brief No. 615

Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened to send arms to countries that could attack Ukraine’s allies (i.e. the West). Speaking at a press conference with foreign news organizations at Russia’s annual economic forum in St Petersburg on June 5, Putin said: “We believe that if someone is thinking that it is possible to supply such weapons [i.e. advanced high-tech, high-precision and long-range weapons] to a war zone in order to deliver strikes at our territory and to create problems for us, why can we not supply our weapons of the same class to those regions around the world where they will target sensitive facilities of the countries that are doing this to Russia? The response could be symmetric. We will give it a thought.” (See ANNEX)

As tensions rise between Israel and Hizbullah, which keeps firing rockets into the north of Israel, anti-liberal Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin suggested that Russia should supply “serious weapons to Hizbullah and the Houthis, up to and including tactical nuclear weapons.”[1]

‘One War; Many Fronts’

In the wake of October 7 Hamas massacre, renowned Russian political expert Fyodor Lukyanov, explained that Israel is an integral part of the “Collective West,” which Russia fiercely confronts.[2] Soon after the attack, Hamas leader abroad Khaled Mash’al said that the Russians are benefiting from it because it is keeping the U.S. distracted from the war in Ukraine.[3] Mash’al went on to claim that the Russians said that the October 7 attack would be taught in military academies.[4] Osama Hamdan of Hamas’s political bureau said at a May 5, 2024 symposium that Hamas maintains contact with Russia and China and that the power of the “resistance axis” is at the service of these countries’ international role.[5]

In order to defeat the “Collective West,” Russia is strengthening relations with all anti-liberal movements and dictatorships. According to Dugin, the final battle against the liberal West is approaching. He said: “Gradually, all countries, continents, and civilizations are becoming an arena of ferocious struggle between the fading unipolar world and the rising multipolar one. One war. Many fronts.”[6] That is, the war against the Collective West will be fought on many fronts to bring about, first and foremost, the fall of the U.S.

Dugin stressed: “After all, this is a struggle between the multipolar world and the unipolar world, which means that it is being waged not only in the interests of Russia as a pole, but also indirectly (or even directly) in the interests of all the emerging geopolitical poles. This is best understood by China and, among Islamic countries, by Iran.”[7]

Each Pole ‘Must Prove Its Right For Existence Through Conflict’

The anti-liberal Russian philosopher explained that “new poles” (i.e. the emerging anti-liberal powers, mainly Russia, China, Iran and North Korea) that “do not agree to tolerate” the West’s “hegemony” will have to fight militarily for the demise of the West-led unipolar world order, so as to replace it with a multipolar world order, in which liberal democracy will be defeated.[8]

Yet, stated Dugin, “multipolarity will not be formed by itself,” and “each of the poles must prove its right for existence through conflict.” This means that the final battle will be fought on several fronts by the anti-liberal forces with the common goal of shaping “full-fledged and sovereign poles.”[9] Russia will fight for total victory in Ukraine; China will go for Taiwan’s annexation (and possibly the militarization of the South China Sea); North Korea will invade South Korea; and the Iran-led resistance axis will attack Israel (and U.S. interests in the Middle East). Moreover, Dugin suggested, more attention should be paid to Mexico, since newly elected President Claudia Sheinbaum may become an ally against Western liberal democracy.[10]

As WWIII is taking shape, the West cannot now afford to show weakness and division if it wants to deter the enemy.

ANNEX: Putin’s Meeting With Heads Of International News Agencies – Kremlin.ru, June 5, 2024

At a press conference with foreign news organizations at Russia’s annual economic forum in St Petersburg on June 5, Russian President Vladimir Putin answered a question about the war in Ukraine by the Italian news agency ANSA. Below is the transcript of his reply:[11]

ANSA Deputy Editor-in-Chief Stefano Polli: “Good evening, Mr. President. Thank you for organizing this meeting. I would like to ask a question about the latest events in Ukraine. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg proposed that Ukraine be given the opportunity to hit targets on Russian territory with weapons supplied from Europe. European countries and the United States agreed with this idea. Not all of them, but the United States did. At the same time, there is a discussion in some countries about sending military advisers and instructors.

“I would like to ask you to comment on these two decisions and what Russia’s reaction to them will be. Thank you.”

Vladimir Putin: “There is nothing new in terms of having advisers and instructors. They are present in Ukraine. Unfortunately for them, they suffer losses. I know this for sure. This is not done on purpose, but losses happen during hostilities. However, the European countries and the United States prefer to keep it secret. This is first.

“Second, as for long-range precision weapons. We need to divide this topic into two parts.

“First, conventional weapons: a multiple-launch rocket system, a long-range of 70 kilometers or something similar. It has been used for a long time. In fact, Ukrainian military personnel can do this on their own. And as for advanced high-tech, high-precision and long-range weapons, such as the British Storm Shadow or the American ATACMS, or French missiles, what can we say? I have also spoken about this, by the way, when I left Uzbekistan.

“ATACMS: 300 kilometers. How are they used and how are they transported? They handed over a missile system (the Pentagon, the Americans did). But how is it used? Ukrainian military personnel cannot do everything on their own and launch strikes with this missile. They are simply technologically unable to do this because it requires satellite reconnaissance; then, based on satellite reconnaissance data (and this is American satellite reconnaissance), a flight mission is formed and then entered into the missile system. And then the soldier who is next to it does it simply automatically: he presses the buttons. He may not even know what will happen next.

“What can the Ukrainian military – not the ones who are just sitting there and pressing buttons – but the higher-ranking ones do when it comes to target assignment? They can identify a target that is a priority for them. But they are not the ones who decide whether a particular target should be hit, because, to reiterate, a WTA (weapon target assignment) is formed and effectively entered only by those who supply the weapons. If we are talking about ATACMS, then the Pentagon is doing it. If it is Storm Shadow, then the British are. It is even more straightforward in the case of Storm Shadow, because the target assignment is entered automatically, without the involvement of the military personnel on the ground. The British do it, that is all there is to it.

“And when the Bundeswehr military were pondering an attack on the Crimean Bridge or other targets, they were thinking for themselves. No one was doing it for them, right? They were going to do it. The same goes for the French specialists. Western specialists do it.

“We have no illusions about it. How are we supposed to respond?

“First, we will, of course, improve our air defense systems. We will be destroying their missiles.

“Second, we believe that if someone is thinking that it is possible to supply such weapons to a war zone in order to deliver strikes at our territory and to create problems for us, why can we not supply our weapons of the same class to those regions around the world where they will target sensitive facilities of the countries that are doing this to Russia? The response could be symmetrical. We will give it a thought.

“Third, sure enough, such actions will wreck international relations, which have already hit rock bottom, and undermine international security. Ultimately, if we see that these countries are being embroiled into a war against us, and this constitutes their direct involvement in the war against the Russian Federation, we reserve the right to respond in kind. Generally speaking, this path may lead to serious problems. I think that covers it all. If you have any leading questions, please go ahead. But I do not think I can add anything to what I just said.”

AUTHOR